Changes

It has become apparent that many churches which were once committed to Scripture and overall held to biblical positions on homosexuality have increasingly yielded to the influence of liberalism on this issues. The Dr. A. L. Barry, President of the Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod states that two reasons for these changes in some churches is that 'First, homosexual groups within these churches often engage in "lobbying" efforts and gain considerable influence. Second and more important, attitudes toward homosexuality have changed as a result of changing attitudes toward the authority and reliability of the Holy Scriptures."<ref>[http://www.lcms.org/graphics/assets/media/LCMS/wa_homosexuality.pdf What about homosexuality]</ref>

It has become apparent that many churches which were once committed to Scripture and overall held to biblical positions on homosexuality have increasingly yielded to the influence of liberalism on this issues. The Dr. A. L. Barry, President of the Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod states that two reasons for these changes in some churches is that 'First, homosexual groups within these churches often engage in "lobbying" efforts and gain considerable influence. Second and more important, attitudes toward homosexuality have changed as a result of changing attitudes toward the authority and reliability of the Holy Scriptures."<ref>[http://www.lcms.org/graphics/assets/media/LCMS/wa_homosexuality.pdf What about homosexuality]</ref>

As concerns the second aspect, evidence is seen which indicates that the degree of fidelity to the historic teaching on homosexual relations among denominations and believers usually corresponds to their view of the Bible. Fundamental, [[evangelical]] type churches hold to the historic position of plenary Divine inspiration, along with a basic literalistic approach to Biblical exegesis, so that while interpretations are understood within the context of their respective literary genres, a wide range of metaphorical meanings of the historical narratives are disallowed. This position basically understands that God, as the author of Holy Scripture, made His will for man evident and to be obeyed, and that His basic doctrines and laws on attitude and behavior, including as regards sexual partners, transcend time and culture. They affirm as critical such doctrines as the virgin birth, the deity of Christ, His  literal vicarious death and resurrection, and second coming. In contrast, liberal revisionism denies the full Divine inspiration of the Bible, especially as concerns many historical accounts, in which they often allow a wide range of metaphorical interpretations, while also allowing denial of the immutability and universality of basic moral commands, such as regards sexual partners. This movement of [[Liberalism]] began during the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, which was helped by the rise of [[evolution]], as both share a common motivation. (cf. Is. 30:9-11; Rm. 8:7; 1Cor. 2:14) <ref>Julian Huxley And The Idolatry Of Evolution, The American Thinker, September 16, 2007</ref>  Louis Cassels<ref>the religion editor for many years for United Press International. comments, typically liberals. Informational, and overall good analysis, though the missionary effects are an effect of the evangelical gospel, not the cause of its growth</ref> states that such   

As concerns the second aspect, evidence is seen which indicates that the degree of fidelity to the historic teaching on homosexual relations among denominations and believers usually corresponds to their view of the Bible. Fundamental, [[evangelical]] type churches hold to the historic position of plenary Divine inspiration, along with a basic literalistic approach to Biblical exegesis, so that while interpretations are understood within the context of their respective literary genres, a wide range of metaphorical meanings of the historical narratives are disallowed. This position basically understands that God, as the author of Holy Scripture, made His will for man evident and to be obeyed, and that His basic doctrines and laws on attitude and behavior, including as regards sexual partners, transcend time and culture. They affirm as critical such doctrines as the virgin birth, the deity of Christ, His  literal vicarious death and resurrection, and second coming. In contrast, liberal revisionism denies the full Divine inspiration of the Bible, especially as concerns many historical accounts, in which they often allow a wide range of metaphorical interpretations, while also allowing denial of the immutability and universality of basic moral commands, such as regards sexual partners. This movement of [[Liberalism]] began during the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, which was helped by the rise of [[evolution]], as both share a common motivation. (cf. Is. 30:9-11; Rm. 8:7; 1Cor. 2:14) <ref>Julian Huxley And The Idolatry Of Evolution, The American Thinker, September 16, 2007</ref>  Louis Cassels, the religion editor for many years for United Press International, <ref>Informational, and overall good analysis, though the missionary effects are an effect of the evangelical gospel, not the cause of its growth</ref></ref> states that such,  

refused to accord any special authority to the Scriptures. They increasingly came to look upon the Bible simply as an ancient book which might, if subjected to proper critical study, yield some reliable data about the life of Jesus and the history of Israel. This attitude was reflected in the vogue of "higher criticism" which swept through German theological schools in the nineteenth century....   

refused to accord any special authority to the Scriptures. They increasingly came to look upon the Bible simply as an ancient book which might, if subjected to proper critical study, yield some reliable data about the life of Jesus and the history of Israel. This attitude was reflected in the vogue of "higher criticism" which swept through German theological schools in the nineteenth century....   

Less extreme liberals, who may be termed Modern Orthodox, continue to uphold the Deity of Christ and other primary doctrines, and some officially hold the Bible to be wholly inspired, but render many historical miraculous accounts to be fables, designed to teach a lesson, but not historical fact, and also  overall do not emphasis the authority of the Bible in practical application. These tend to subscribe to the "historical-critical method," which tends to disallow the miraculous in favor of natural explanations.<ref>[http://www.brfwitness.org/?p=603 The Bible’s Deadly Enemy, BRF Witness]</ref>, contrary to conservatives, <ref>[http://www.abu.nb.ca/Courses/NTIntro/LifeJ/HistCrit.htm The historical-critical method, by Barry D. Smith</ref> Such also hold to the liberal revisionist "Documentary Source Hypothesis", which renders the Bible to be the work of  editors who edited it over long periods of time, rather than what the text states.<ref>[http://www.ukapologetics.net/docu.htm Does Anyone Still Believe the 'Documentary Hypothesis'?]</ref> Many in this camp, in contrast to New Testament Christianity, are likely to doctrinally compromise on popular moral issues, or allow such in their denomination, and their doctrinal statements  regarding the Bible tend to lack doctrinal depth and firmness.   

Less extreme liberals, who may be termed Modern Orthodox, continue to uphold the Deity of Christ and other primary doctrines, and some officially hold the Bible to be wholly inspired, but render many historical miraculous accounts to be fables, designed to teach a lesson, but not historical fact, and also  overall do not emphasis the authority of the Bible in practical application. These tend to subscribe to the "historical-critical method," which tends to disallow the miraculous in favor of natural explanations.<ref>[http://www.brfwitness.org/?p=603 The Bible’s Deadly Enemy, BRF Witness]</ref>, contrary to conservatives, <ref>[http://www.abu.nb.ca/Courses/NTIntro/LifeJ/HistCrit.htm The historical-critical method, by Barry D. Smith</ref> Such also hold to the liberal revisionist "Documentary Source Hypothesis", which renders the Bible to be the work of  editors who edited it over long periods of time, rather than what the text states.<ref>[http://www.ukapologetics.net/docu.htm Does Anyone Still Believe the 'Documentary Hypothesis'?]</ref> Many in this camp, in contrast to New Testament Christianity, are likely to doctrinally compromise on popular moral issues, or allow such in their denomination, and their doctrinal statements  regarding the Bible tend to lack doctrinal depth and firmness.   

Evangelical Christianity (which, as defined by Barna research, makes up approx. 6-7 percent of the United States <ref>[http://www.barna.org/barna-update/article/13-culture/111-survey-explores-who-qualifies-as-an-evangelical Survey Explores Who Qualifies As an Evangelical, The Barna Group, Ltd.]</ref><ref>[http://www.barna.org/barna-update/article/5-barna-update/173-godless-hollywood-bible-belt-new-research-exploring-faith-in-americas-largest-markets-produces-surprises]</ref>  is more distinctive in that it holds to [[sola scriptura]], that the Bible is the final, but not the only, authority, wholly inspired by God and inerrant, although most hold that this refers to the original  manuscripts. Their scholars hold to the historical contextual and grammatical method, which understands Scripture in the light of its immediate and larger contexts, as well as linguistically aspects  , and affirms its statements as accurate and true, within their respective literary  genres, in contrast to revisionist theories designed to negate its authority.<ref>[http://www.wlsessays.net/files/BrugHC.pdf  Why the Historical-Critical Method of Interpreting Scripture is Incompatible with Confessional Lutheranism. by John F. Brug]</ref> Such also hold to [[salvation]] by grace through faith in the crucified and risen Lord Jesus Christ and His sinless shed blood, by which the contrite and repentant soul is justified before God, not on the basis of merit gained by their own works. <ref>Ibid. Barna.org </ref>   

Evangelical Christianity (which, as defined by Barna research, makes up approx. 6-7 percent of the United States <ref>[http://www.barna.org/barna-update/article/13-culture/111-survey-explores-who-qualifies-as-an-evangelical Survey Explores Who Qualifies As an Evangelical, The Barna Group, Ltd.]</ref><ref>[http://www.barna.org/barna-update/article/5-barna-update/173-godless-hollywood-bible-belt-new-research-exploring-faith-in-americas-largest-markets-produces-surprises]</ref>  is more distinctive in that it holds to [[sola scriptura]], that the Bible is the final, but not the only, authority, wholly inspired by God and inerrant, although most hold that this refers to the original  manuscripts. Their scholars hold to the historical contextual and grammatical method, which understands Scripture in the light of its immediate and larger contexts, as well as linguistically aspects  , and affirms its statements as accurate and true, within their respective literary  genres, in contrast to revisionist theories designed to negate its authority.<ref>[http://www.wlsessays.net/files/BrugHC.pdf  Why the Historical-Critical Method of Interpreting Scripture is Incompatible with Confessional Lutheranism. by John F. Brug]</ref> Such also hold to [[salvation]] by grace through faith in the crucified and risen Lord Jesus Christ and His sinless shed blood, by which the contrite and repentant soul is justified before God, not on the basis of merit gained by their own works. <ref>Ibid. Barna.org </ref>  

 

 

Presently, research polls indicate a slim majority (58%) of self identified Catholics and mainline Protestants (56%) favor of acceptance of homosexuality, with 26 percent of evangelical Protestants concurring.<ref>[http://religions.pewforum.org/comparisons Religious landscape survey The Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life]</ref>. Another poll shows 39 percent of Roman Catholics and 79 percent of evangelical Americans affirm that homosexual behavior is sinful.<ref>[http://www.christianpost.com/article/20080606/survey-americans-divided-on-homosexuality-as-sin.htm LifeWay Research study, June 2008]</ref> 

==Denominational positions on the Bible, and homosexuality==

==Denominational positions on the Bible, and homosexuality==